Early large treatment effects can arise in small studies, which lessen as more data accumulate. This study aimed to retrospectively examine whether early treatment effects occurred for two multicentre orthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and explore biases related to this. Included RCTs were ProFHER (PROximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation), a two-arm study of surgery versus non-surgical treatment for proximal humerus fractures, and UK FROST (United Kingdom Frozen Shoulder Trial), a three-arm study of two surgical and one non-surgical treatment for frozen shoulder. To determine whether early treatment effects were present, the primary outcome of Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) was compared on forest plots for: the chief investigator’s (CI) site to the remaining sites, the first five sites opened to the other sites, and patients grouped in quintiles by randomization date. Potential for bias was assessed by comparing mean age and proportion of patients with indicators of poor outcome between included and excluded/non-consenting participants.Aims
Methods
There is little published on the outcomes after restarting elective orthopaedic procedures following cessation of surgery due to the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, the reported perioperative mortality in patients who acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection while undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery was 18% to 20%. The aim of this study is to report the surgical outcomes, complications, and risk of developing COVID-19 in 2,316 consecutive patients who underwent elective orthopaedic surgery in the latter part of 2020 and comparing it to the same, pre-pandemic, period in 2019. A retrospective service evaluation of patients who underwent elective surgical procedures between 16 June 2020 and 12 December 2020 was undertaken. The number and type of cases, demographic details, American society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, BMI, 30-day readmission rates, mortality, and complications at one- and six-week intervals were obtained and compared with patients who underwent surgery during the same six-month period in 2019.Aims
Methods
Restarting planned surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is a clinical and societal priority, but it is unknown whether it can be done safely and include high-risk or complex cases. We developed a Surgical Prioritization and Allocation Guide (SPAG). Here, we validate its effectiveness and safety in COVID-free sites. A multidisciplinary surgical prioritization committee developed the SPAG, incorporating procedural urgency, shared decision-making, patient safety, and biopsychosocial factors; and applied it to 1,142 adult patients awaiting orthopaedic surgery. Patients were stratified into four priority groups and underwent surgery at three COVID-free sites, including one with access to a high dependency unit (HDU) or intensive care unit (ICU) and specialist resources. Safety was assessed by the number of patients requiring inpatient postoperative HDU/ICU admission, contracting COVID-19 within 14 days postoperatively, and mortality within 30 days postoperatively.Aims
Methods
To evaluate safety outcomes and patient satisfaction of the re-introduction of elective orthopaedic surgery on ‘green’ (non-COVID-19) sites during the COVID-19 pandemic. A strategy consisting of phased relaxation of clinical comorbidity criteria was developed. Patients from the orthopaedic waiting list were selected according to these criteria and observed recommended preoperative isolation protocols. Surgery was performed at green sites (two local private hospitals) under the COVID-19 NHS contract. The first 100 consecutive patients that met the Phase 1 criteria and underwent surgery were included. In hospital and postoperative complications with specific enquiry as to development of COVID-19 symptoms or need and outcome for COVID-19 testing at 14 days and six weeks was recorded. Patient satisfaction was surveyed at 14 days postoperatively.Aims
Methods
Elective operating was halted during the COVID-19 pandemic to increase the capacity to provide care to an unprecedented volume of critically unwell patients. During the pandemic, the orthopaedic department at the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board restructured the trauma service, relocating semi-urgent ambulatory trauma operating to the isolated clean elective centre (St. Woolos’ Hospital) from the main hospital receiving COVID-19 patients (Royal Gwent Hospital). This study presents our experience of providing semi-urgent trauma care in a COVID-19-free surgical unit as a safe way to treat trauma patients during the pandemic and a potential model for restarting an elective orthopaedic service. All patients undergoing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic at the orthopaedic surgical unit (OSU) in St. Woolos’ Hospital from 23 March 2020 to 24 April 2020 were included. All patients that were operated on had a telephone follow-up two weeks after surgery to assess if they had experienced COVID-19 symptoms or had been tested for COVID-19. The nature of admission, operative details, and patient demographics were obtained from the health board’s electronic record. Staff were assessed for sickness, self-isolation, and COVID-19 status.Aims
Methods
Virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) are being increasingly used to offer safe and efficient orthopaedic review without the requirement for face-to-face contact. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we sought to develop an online referral pathway that would allow us to provide definitive orthopaedic management plans and reduce face-to-face contact at the fracture clinics. All patients presenting to the emergency department from 21March 2020 with a musculoskeletal injury or potential musculoskeletal infection deemed to require orthopaedic input were discussed using a secure messaging app. A definitive management plan was communicated by an on-call senior orthopaedic decision-maker. We analyzed the time to decision, if further information was needed, and the referral outcome. An analysis of the orthopaedic referrals for the same period in 2019 was also performed as a comparison.Introduction
Methods
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a rapidly implemented restructuring of UK healthcare services. The The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, became a central hub for the provision of trauma services for North Central/East London (NCEL) while providing a musculoskeletal tumour service for the south of England, the Midlands, and Wales and an urgent spinal service for London. This study reviews our paediatric practice over this period in order to share our experience and lessons learned. Our hospital admission pathways are described and the safety of surgical and interventional radiological procedures performed under general anaesthesia (GA) with regards to COVID-19 in a paediatric population are evaluated. All paediatric patients (≤ 16 years) treated in our institution during the six-week peak period of the pandemic were included. Prospective data for all paediatric trauma and urgent elective admissions and retrospective data for all sarcoma admissions were collected. Telephone interviews were conducted with all patients and families to assess COVID-19 related morbidity at 14 days post-discharge.Introduction
Methods
To determine the impact of COVID-19 on orthopaediatric admissions and fracture clinics within a regional integrated care system (ICS). A retrospective review was performed for all paediatric orthopaedic patients admitted across the region during the recent lockdown period (24 March 2020 to 10 May 2020) and the same period in 2019. Age, sex, mechanism, anatomical region, and treatment modality were compared, as were fracture clinic attendances within the receiving regional major trauma centre (MTC) between the two periods.Aims
Methods
The first death in the UK caused by COVID-19 occurred on 5 March 2020. We aim to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of major trauma and orthopaedic patients admitted in the early COVID-19 era. A prospective trauma registry was reviewed at a Level 1 Major Trauma Centre. We divided patients into Group A, 40 days prior to 5 March 2020, and into Group B, 40 days after.Aims
Methods
We report the results of six trauma and orthopaedic
projects to Kenya in the last three years. The aims are to deliver both
a trauma service and teaching within two hospitals; one a district
hospital near Mount Kenya in Nanyuki, the other the largest public
hospital in Kenya in Mombasa. The Kenya Orthopaedic Project team
consists of a wide range of multidisciplinary professionals that
allows the experience to be shared across those specialties. A follow-up
clinic is held three months after each mission to review the patients.
To our knowledge there are no reported outcomes in the literature
for similar projects. A total of 211 operations have been performed and 400 patients
seen during the projects. Most cases were fractures of the lower
limb; we have been able to follow up 163 patients (77%) who underwent
surgical treatment. We reflect on the results so far and discuss
potential improvements for future missions.
We present a retrospective review of a single-surgeon series of 30 consecutive lengthenings in 27 patients with congenital short femur using the Ilizarov technique performed between 1994 and 2005. The mean increase in length was 5.8 cm/18.65% (3.3 to 10.4, 9.7% to 48.8%), with a mean time in the frame of 223 days (75 to 363). By changing from a distal to a proximal osteotomy for lengthening, the mean range of knee movement was significantly increased from 98.1° to 124.2° (p = 0.041) and there was a trend towards a reduced requirement for quadricepsplasty, although this was not statistically significant (p = 0.07). The overall incidence of regenerate deformation or fracture requiring open reduction and internal fixation was similar in the distal and proximal osteotomy groups (56.7% and 53.8%, respectively). However, in the proximal osteotomy group, pre-placement of a Rush nail reduced this rate from 100% without a nail to 0% with a nail (p <
0.001). When comparing a distal osteotomy with a proximal one over a Rush nail for lengthening, there was a significant decrease in fracture rate from 58.8% to 0% (p = 0.043). We recommend that in this group of patients lengthening of the femur with an Ilizarov construct be carried out through a proximal osteotomy over a Rush nail. Lengthening should also be limited to a maximum of 6 cm during one treatment, or 20% of the original length of the femur, in order to reduce the risk of complications.
Femoral lengthening using the Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor is a new technique. However, with intramedullary distraction the surgeon has less control over the lengthening process. Therefore, 33 femora lengthened with this device were assessed to evaluate the effect of operative variables under the surgeon’s control on the course of lengthening. The desired lengthening was achieved in 32 of 33 limbs. Problems encountered included difficulty in achieving length in eight femora (24%) and uncontrolled lengthening in seven (21%). Uncontrolled lengthening was more likely if the osteotomy was placed with less than 80 mm of the thick portion of the nail in the distal fragment (p = 0.052), and a failure to lengthen was more likely if there was over 125 mm in the distal fragment (p = 0.008). The latter problem was reduced with over-reaming by 2.5 mm to 3 mm. Previous intramedullary nailing also predisposed to uncontrolled lengthening (p = 0.042), and these patients required less reaming. Using the Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor, good outcomes were obtained; problems were minimised by optimising the position of the osteotomy and the amount of over-reaming performed.
